Inside Obama's War Room

[grillo7]

"If you were allowed to perch inside the Situation Room at the White House and listen to a National Security Council meeting, you’d find the most centralized and controlled operation, well, ever. It is an Obama-centric system. The president sets the schedule of meetings, runs the discussions with an iron hand, actually calls on attendees to talk, and usually ends the session by making decisions at the table. And either because of his command personality and style or the moderate consensus of the participants or both, they are getting along with each other better than any group of NSC officials in memory."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-03-11/inside-obamas-war-room/

I don't agree with the author's conclusions, I actually think it's great that Obama is making so many decision, but it's an interesting look at how things are going in regards to foreign policy decision making.

[Pirate Smile]

1. Thanks for the post. Interesting.

:)

[wroberts189]

2. interesting..good post nt

[FrenchieCat]

3. Interesting to say the least......

But I will quarrel with quite a bit of what he opines....
most being that Obama has had plenty time to think about
his overall strategy. He ran for two years,
and has even written books about his strategy and
what he envisioned for this country....

So when this writer states....
"There is also the question of the frequency of major new decisions.
It hardly seems that a day goes by without some new policy and some new front-page headline.
It’s almost as if Obama’s clarion call for change has gone beyond an expression
of need and become an ideology in and of—and for—itself.

Again, I don’t quarrel with changing a great deal of what the former president
did to us and the world. He did many awful things that require fixing.
But it’s hard to escape the feeling that some of the Obama decisions
fall into the category of change for change’s sake. :eyes:

It’s one thing to know that Bush’s mistakes must be rectified and another
to know precisely what the new approach should be. :eyes:

Obama should give himself more time in between policies announcing far-reaching departures.
In doing so much, so fast, he also runs the risk of people coming to
believe he’s not thinking these things through or that he’s arrogant,
whether or not he’s making the right calls.

Those paragraphs are a bunch of bullshit that aren't supported
by anything other than the author underestimating
Barack Obama.


So bottomline is that I question taking this guy's opinion
as facts, period. After all, he did say there were no leaks,
so how does he know anything? :shrug:

[grillo7]

4. You're right...

"Those paragraphs are a bunch of bullshit that aren't supported
by anything other than the author underestimating
Barack Obama."

I completely agree with you. For one thing, I've always loathed how deplorably slow progress usually goes in Washington. I'm pleased Obama is actually getting things going, apparently.

But then, some with other interests in mind are opposed to change. It's interesting to note that the author is the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, so he probably does have a good idea of what's going on. I just don't agree with his analysis.

[elleng]

5. Finds it hard to believe the participants aren't chickens!!!!

'The Obama system doesn’t close off debate, and participants aren’t complaining about not being able to speak their piece. But I find it hard to believe—based on my own experience at such meetings—that the people at the table don’t feel more constrained than usual by the direct involvement and control of Obama. While his words certainly invite disagreement and dissent, his command manner may discourage it.'